Arthur, I don't mean to be disrespectful. I understand your feelings that the compounds technology is excessive already anyhow.

This article really made me understand that this is a fight our predecessors have fought and I would be remiss to not share in.

The following is a portion of an article written in 1946 concerning the crossbow issue:

Many of us old time gun hunters were looking for new thrills and interest in hunting. We wanted to go hunting for hunting's sake with odds. We love the feel of the bow; it feels good to flex our muscles in drawing the bow; we thrill at the flight of the arrow, conscious that ours was the energy that sent it on its way. We shoot the bow for relaxation and exercise and we hunt for the joy that is in it.

We are aware of the inefficiencies of the bow as a hunting weapon. We don't want a weapon that is just as accurate or nearly so, as a gun. If we did we would hunt with a gun. That it takes little physical exertion to cock a crossbow doesn't appeal to us nor does the fact that you can shoot good scores with a crossbow ‘without tiresome practice.'

Most of us archers will be striving to our dying day to improve our techniques and shooting skill. Compared to the bow, the crossbow was short-lived. The bow was in existence and use for tens of thousands of years before the crossbow and survived the advent of gunpowder.

The crossbow died with the invention of fire arms. We, as archers, are not interested in digging up its remains, and trying to resurrect it in the name of archery."

A.J. Michelson, President of the National Field Archery Association, in an editorial published in the October, 1946 issue Archery.

As you see, this fight has gone on for a long time. I hope it is not loss on our watch. Brokaw’s book on us will be the “Easy Generation.”